JENIPHA ELMA FRANCIS PINTO Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Vijay A. Palekar alongwith Mr. Tushar Shirodkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Deep Shirodkar, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 and 2 in Writ Petition No. 638 of 2016, Mr. Arun Talaulikar, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 and 2 in Writ Petition No. 664 of 2016. Mr. Shivan Desai, the learned Counsel appears for the respondent No.8 in both the petitions and Mr. Parikshit Sawant, the learned Counsel appears for the respondents No.3 to 7 and 9 to 34 in both the petitions.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the parties agree that the issues involved in both these petitions are identical and therefore they may be disposed of by common judgment. They request that the Writ Petition No.638 of 2016 may be treated as the lead petition.

(3.) The petitioners challenge the selection and appointments of the respondents no.3 to 57 to the posts of Assistant Data Entry Operator (ADEO) in preference to the petitioners and seek appropriate writ to strike down such selection/appointment. The petitioners also seek appropriate writ to direct the respondent State to appoint the petitioners to the posts of ADEO with retrospective effect and with all consequential benefits.